> >Use a different filesystem, like SFS or PFS3 - they don't generally
> >invalidate.
>
> Just wondering.
> Matthew do you really think that using SFS or PFS3 is a
> better option than using the latest File-System (FFS?), that came with
> the new AmigaOS3.5???
I don't know what the capabilities of the new FFS are, but it seems likely
to me that it is generally the same as the old FFS, except expanded for
larger disks. I'm quite willing to be corrected there.
If that is so, both systems have significant advantages and disadvantages.
1. PFS3 and SFS outperform FFS by quite a good margin in both speed and
disk utilisation.
2. PFS3 and SFS volumes *do not* invalidate. They are designed to show the
old disk state if interrupted while writing. However, this security
only covers the meta-data. If one is half-way through altering the
contents of a file, the bit that was being written may be wrong
afterwards. With FFS, not only does that happen, but also the
meta-data is left inconsistent, and the validator is meant to try and
fix that, which it doesn't always manage.
3. If you accidentally blatt various portions of the disk surface (though
how you would manage that is anyone's guess - I did), then you are far
more likely to get something back from FFS than PFS2 - I don't know
about SFS.
Generally, you should have problems a lot less often with PFS3 or SFS, but
if you do have a problem, it's easier to fix FFS.
There's no substitute for backing up.
> Anyone tested new the latest File-System that came with the new
> AmigaOS3.5?
I would like to know what it's like too.
Matthew
--
I am Bill Gates of Borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimil-
Error - General protection fault in module "BORG.EXE"
_____________________________________________________________
NetConnect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send an 'unsubcribe'
message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
